Alex Mathiasen(a...@mira.dk) on 2013.02.28 14:51:25 +0100: > Dear recipients, > > I have been using OpenBGP for a while with OpenBSD - And I am very > satisfied with the performance and amazed by the ease of configuration. > > My BGPD is configured against a Danish ISP called TDC - And we were > previously configured to receive a full routing table. > > However a few months ago I ran into an issue where my BGPD stopped > working properly.
Was this in November by any chance? [>>>> Alex Mathiasen >>] Yes, it was at 29.11.2012. Happened in the middle of the night.. :-( > It appeared the BGPD kept receiving the routing tables, and then start > all over. > > Looking into the log files, it appeared BGPD received a certain route > in the routing table, and then grumbled about the prefix, apparently > for some reason the result was BGPD kept reloading when it reached > this route. The result was of course my network was down. > > As TDC (My ISP) couldn't resolve which route that caused this issue > (They told > me: "That's what happened when you use third party software", so no > help there...), we agreed that my connection would be set to Default > candidate, instead of receiving a full routing table. > > So now I have configured a static route to forward all my traffic to > this route. However this is not the result I wanted, as I am about to > have one more connection, so I have 2 connections outbound. > > But the automatic failover switch / load balancing won't work, as long > as I have my static route. > > This is why I want to go back to receiving a full routing table. > > Is there any way of configuring BGPD to ignore a specific route in > case of "corrupted" prefix, so this won't happened again? No there is not such a feature, and the bgp protocol mandates session teardown in certain cases anyway. Your report lacks a few details, please send with dmesg next time. And your bgpd.conf is not valid. [>>>> Alex Mathiasen >>] I do apologize for the lack of information, I was unable to find my logfile from that date, and was unable to provide with more information. My guess is that your problem is fixed by the patch available on http://www.openbsd.org/errata52.html [>>>> Alex Mathiasen >>] It would appear this is the patch I need to resolve this issue. So I will try to apply this patch, thank you! You could also update to -current. /Benno
